Feldman v. Cutaia

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that although \narrow\ exceptions exist, continuous ownership rule is a \bright line rule\ that Delaware courts \adhere[ ] to closely\
• noting that plaintiff does not allege “that he, or any other person who was a [minority] stockholder at the time, was barred from participating”
• seeking to avoid an interpretation of Gentile that \would swallow the general rule that equity dilution claims are solely derivative\
• seeking to avoid an interpretation of Gentile that “would swallow the general rule that equity dilution claims are solely derivative”
• articulating the Gentile standard as requiring controller to receive an “exclusive benefit of increased equity ownership and voting power for inadequate consideration” (emphasis added)
• finding no control group when complaint only alleged that the board members and their families controlled 60% of the company’s equity but alleged no agreement between them

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).